Here's the thing about CharlottesvilleIt

[Correll]

I gave their motives and as to evidence?


It is all over the place, including YOUR posting of a kkk paper, not only giving it exposure to everyone on this site, but supporting the myth that they are relevant, and conflating them with everyone who voted for Trump.

Dumbfuck, the KKK openly endorsing and supporting Trump was news and the news, left, center, and right, covered it as they should have.

How much coverage did the endorsement of Obama by the Communist Party get? I think I heard ONE reference to it on Fox, and that was it.

Did you see it over and over again, and was Obama questioned about it by the media over and over again?

You're actually trying to make the argument that the news shouldn't cover news.

Wow. That is such a powerful example of someone, who knows they can't refute what their political enemy says, and so they not only make up an absurd strawman,

but take it to an absolute extreme.


Really demonstrates the depth of your fear of the truth.

ANywhooo, your use of a strawman is an admission that you know I am right.

THe difference in the way the media covered Obama's endorsement by the Communist Party compared to the way the media covered Trump's endorsement by the Klan, shows that they are engaged not is reporting

but in propaganda.

That's neither a strawman nor admission you're right. You idiotically stated they should be "ignored" and you blamed the left for not ignoring them.

Report yes, massive over coverage to create the illusion of relevance and to use it to smear republicans, no.

I offered as a counter example the way the mainstream media covered the endorsement of Obama by the communists.

Would you like to address the massive differences?

 

[Correll]

I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

More evidence you're a nut. He misquoted the guy in the video which I showed the actual quote, which is in the video. There's absolutely no question The Original Tree lied. You believe he was telling the truth. because like him, you're a rightwing nut.

YOur post addressed nothing in my post.


You simply repeated your previous position.


THat is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. Your post is invalid and you lose.


Obviously you have no rebuttal to my last post and thus it stands as the final word, at least until you muster the courage to address it's argument.


Here it si again, so we avoid the common lefty tactic of burying the truth under bs.




I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

LOLOL

You're still trying to argue a quote you never heard???

YOur post addressed nothing in my post.


You simply repeated your previous position.


THat is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. Your post is invalid and you lose.


Obviously you have no rebuttal to my last post and thus it stands as the final word, at least until you muster the courage to address it's argument.


Here it si again, so we avoid the common lefty tactic of burying the truth under bs.




I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

LOLOL

You have no point. You don't know what the guy said. You confessed you didn't watch the video.

Our post addressed nothing in my post.


You simply repeated your previous position.


THat is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. Your post is invalid and you lose.


Obviously you have no rebuttal to my last post and thus it stands as the final word, at least until you muster the courage to address it's argument.


Here it si again, so we avoid the common lefty tactic of burying the truth under bs.




I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

 

[Correll]

Tell it to the People's Car, or Volkswagen as HItler named it. Created as a government program to make cheap cars for the people.

Pretty socialist to me.

And there were no other private car companies?

Don't know. Why do you ask?




\

Because there were other private car companies. Volkswagon is not evidence of a socialist society.

The question was not whether the German nation was socialist at that time, but whether the Nazis were.

The People's Car, a massive government program to build cheap affordable cars for the People, shows that they were quite socialist.


The nazis had been in control at that point for 5 years. It shows their ideological thinking. Which was/is heavily socialist.

And that doesn't make them socialist as they allowed for private competition.

It shows that they were not pure communists.

To claim that, after merely 5 years in power, that they had not completely nationalized the car industry is proof that they were not socialists is absurd.


The People's Car. Government program to build cars for the masses.


And you can't see any socialism?


Bullshit.

 

[Faun]

Dumbfuck, the KKK openly endorsing and supporting Trump was news and the news, left, center, and right, covered it as they should have.

How much coverage did the endorsement of Obama by the Communist Party get? I think I heard ONE reference to it on Fox, and that was it.

Did you see it over and over again, and was Obama questioned about it by the media over and over again?

You're actually trying to make the argument that the news shouldn't cover news.

Wow. That is such a powerful example of someone, who knows they can't refute what their political enemy says, and so they not only make up an absurd strawman,

but take it to an absolute extreme.


Really demonstrates the depth of your fear of the truth.

ANywhooo, your use of a strawman is an admission that you know I am right.

THe difference in the way the media covered Obama's endorsement by the Communist Party compared to the way the media covered Trump's endorsement by the Klan, shows that they are engaged not is reporting

but in propaganda.

That's neither a strawman nor admission you're right. You idiotically stated they should be "ignored" and you blamed the left for not ignoring them.

Report yes, massive over coverage to create the illusion of relevance and to use it to smear republicans, no.

I offered as a counter example the way the mainstream media covered the endorsement of Obama by the communists.

Would you like to address the massive differences?

Now you're deviating from your own idiot position; which is that they should be ignored.

 

[Faun]

More evidence you're a nut. He misquoted the guy in the video which I showed the actual quote, which is in the video. There's absolutely no question The Original Tree lied. You believe he was telling the truth. because like him, you're a rightwing nut.

YOur post addressed nothing in my post.


You simply repeated your previous position.


THat is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. Your post is invalid and you lose.


Obviously you have no rebuttal to my last post and thus it stands as the final word, at least until you muster the courage to address it's argument.


Here it si again, so we avoid the common lefty tactic of burying the truth under bs.




I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

LOLOL

You're still trying to argue a quote you never heard???

YOur post addressed nothing in my post.


You simply repeated your previous position.


THat is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. Your post is invalid and you lose.


Obviously you have no rebuttal to my last post and thus it stands as the final word, at least until you muster the courage to address it's argument.


Here it si again, so we avoid the common lefty tactic of burying the truth under bs.




I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

LOLOL

You have no point. You don't know what the guy said. You confessed you didn't watch the video.

Our post addressed nothing in my post.


You simply repeated your previous position.


THat is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. Your post is invalid and you lose.


Obviously you have no rebuttal to my last post and thus it stands as the final word, at least until you muster the courage to address it's argument.


Here it si again, so we avoid the common lefty tactic of burying the truth under bs.




I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

You can keep repeating that mindless nonsense all you want; the fact remains, you have no position to argue about what the guy in that video said since you didn't hear his comment from his own lips. You have absolutely zero knowledge of the context in which he was speaking ... and worse, you're moronically basing your position on the misquote offered by The Original Tree, who was caught lying about what the guy actually said.

 

[Faun]

And there were no other private car companies?

Don't know. Why do you ask?




\

Because there were other private car companies. Volkswagon is not evidence of a socialist society.

The question was not whether the German nation was socialist at that time, but whether the Nazis were.

The People's Car, a massive government program to build cheap affordable cars for the People, shows that they were quite socialist.


The nazis had been in control at that point for 5 years. It shows their ideological thinking. Which was/is heavily socialist.

And that doesn't make them socialist as they allowed for private competition.

It shows that they were not pure communists.

To claim that, after merely 5 years in power, that they had not completely nationalized the car industry is proof that they were not socialists is absurd.


The People's Car. Government program to build cars for the masses.


And you can't see any socialism?


Bullshit.

They never nationalized their auto industry nor did they ever claim they wanted to. You're spouting your usual claptrap because it's important to you to tie the Nazi's with the left.

 

[Boss]

Several dozen torch-wielding protesters gathered Saturday in Charlottesville, Va., chanting Nazi rhetoric as well as "Russia is our friend." Mayor Mike Signer has issued a statement likening the event to a KKK demonstration.

The group congregated in Lee Park by a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, which is slated to be removed from the premises later this year following a February city council vote. Earlier in the day, protesters had also gathered at nearby Jackson Park, voicing their commitment to protecting what they called their "white heritage."

The KKK is allowed to peacefully demonstrate in America! I don't agree with their views... I don't agree with Black Lives Matter... but they have Freedom of Speech! What part of this are you not comprehending?

I don't care if you write twenty pages of accusations of what they said or symbolized... unless they called for violence or made imminent threats, they have every right to speak in the public square... just like YOU do! That's fucking AMERICA!

I agree with you, they can say whatever they want, as long as they do not threaten or get violent, and from what all the Pastors said who were meeting at a nearby church, they got violent and these church goers were scared to death and then the anti fascists came in and as far as they are concerned, saved their lives and got them to safety!

Well according to SCOTUS in Brandenburg v. Ohio, they can even threaten... as long as the threat isn't likely or imminent.

Antifa certainly didn't ride into Charlottesville on their white horses to rescue helpless people trapped in a church by violent white supremacists. I've never heard such absolute revisionist crap in my life. Antifa showed up, as they always do, to instigate violence. They show up in masks and hoods, welding chains and bike locks, to beat down defenseless conservatives they disagree with politically.

 

[Faun]

Several dozen torch-wielding protesters gathered Saturday in Charlottesville, Va., chanting Nazi rhetoric as well as "Russia is our friend." Mayor Mike Signer has issued a statement likening the event to a KKK demonstration.

The group congregated in Lee Park by a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, which is slated to be removed from the premises later this year following a February city council vote. Earlier in the day, protesters had also gathered at nearby Jackson Park, voicing their commitment to protecting what they called their "white heritage."

The KKK is allowed to peacefully demonstrate in America! I don't agree with their views... I don't agree with Black Lives Matter... but they have Freedom of Speech! What part of this are you not comprehending?

I don't care if you write twenty pages of accusations of what they said or symbolized... unless they called for violence or made imminent threats, they have every right to speak in the public square... just like YOU do! That's fucking AMERICA!

I agree with you, they can say whatever they want, as long as they do not threaten or get violent, and from what all the Pastors said who were meeting at a nearby church, they got violent and these church goers were scared to death and then the anti fascists came in and as far as they are concerned, saved their lives and got them to safety!

Well according to SCOTUS in Brandenburg v. Ohio, they can even threaten... as long as the threat isn't likely or imminent.

Antifa certainly didn't ride into Charlottesville on their white horses to rescue helpless people trapped in a church by violent white supremacists. I've never heard such absolute revisionist crap in my life. Antifa showed up, as they always do, to instigate violence. They show up in masks and hoods, welding chains and bike locks, to beat down defenseless conservatives they disagree with politically.

Defenseless? The alt-righters said they were armed. One of them used a car as a weapon.

 

[Clementine]

You bring up some good points. It really is about freedom of speech. The very reason for that is to allow people to speak regardless of their views.

I also agree that labelling some as hate groups is meant to take away their freedom of speech. Hate speech is a myth. If speech encourages or promotes violence, then it's inciting riots or harm and that is wrong. Specifically calling to attack or kill others is not free speech but rather a threat.

The left thought that Trump's name in chalk on a sidewalk was hate speech. The same people who would be okay with Hillary or Obama's name being spray painted on the side of a building thought something written in chalk should be investigated as both vandalism and a threat. Can't make this stuff up.

While a lot on the right are being sucked into debating this mess, I don't know what else they should do. For years, the right tended not to engage the left when they uttered the most ridiculous accusations and that allowed their rhetoric to go unchallenged.

I think they need to be called on this.

It's mostly liberal media misrepresenting what took place and there are plenty of people who listen to them or run with the sensational headlines. Those are the same ones who think watching Seth Myers and other late night talk shows is the way to keep up with current events.

 

[Boss]

You bring up some good points. It really is about freedom of speech. The very reason for that is to allow people to speak regardless of their views.

I also agree that labelling some as hate groups is meant to take away their freedom of speech. Hate speech is a myth. If speech encourages or promotes violence, then it's inciting riots or harm and that is wrong. Specifically calling to attack or kill others is not free speech but rather a threat.

The left thought that Trump's name in chalk on a sidewalk was hate speech. The same people who would be okay with Hillary or Obama's name being spray painted on the side of a building thought something written in chalk should be investigated as both vandalism and a threat. Can't make this stuff up.

While a lot on the right are being sucked into debating this mess, I don't know what else they should do. For years, the right tended not to engage the left when they uttered the most ridiculous accusations and that allowed their rhetoric to go unchallenged.

I think they need to be called on this.

It's mostly liberal media misrepresenting what took place and there are plenty of people who listen to them or run with the sensational headlines. Those are the same ones who think watching Seth Myers and other late night talk shows is the way to keep up with current events.

Thanks to the failed public education system, and in some cases, secondary education system, we now have a generation or more who totally don't understand what the First Amendment does or how it applies. It drives me nuts when some young libtard chortles about Colin Kaepernick's "right to free speech" when you don't have a free speech right as an employee of a private company. You can't stand on my property and exercise free speech unless I permit you to.

Aside from their total misunderstanding of the First Amendment, some of them seem to believe that violence perpetrated by left wing radicals is okay because they are "fighting the good fight" or some such nonsense.

 

[Care4all]

Wanna see all the posts on this site labeling BLM and antifa as hate groups by the so called conservatives/right wingers....? hypocrisy at its best!

 

[Care4all]

by labeling the KKK a hate group nearly put them out of business a couple of times in our history...though like the Phoenix it seems to always rise from the ashes...only decades later...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wanna see all the posts on this site labeling BLM and antifa as hate groups by the so called conservatives/right wingers....? hypocrisy at its best!

You consider BLM and antifa love groups?
LOL!

 

[Boss]

Wanna see all the posts on this site labeling BLM and antifa as hate groups by the so called conservatives/right wingers....? hypocrisy at its best!

I have no problem with individuals labeling this group or that a "hate group". It's when we start seriously discussing some kind of censorship of "hate groups" that I have a big problem. I'm not the least big hypocritical, I consistently stand for freedom of speech.

Now you want to show me where I have suggested we label BLM or Antifa a hate group and then blackball them across social media platforms, PayPal and Google? That's what YOUR side is talking about... and doing! Southern Poverty Law Center released a list of hate groups, among them, Family Research Council. A Christian group opposed to gay marriage.

 

[Correll]

How much coverage did the endorsement of Obama by the Communist Party get? I think I heard ONE reference to it on Fox, and that was it.

Did you see it over and over again, and was Obama questioned about it by the media over and over again?

You're actually trying to make the argument that the news shouldn't cover news.

Wow. That is such a powerful example of someone, who knows they can't refute what their political enemy says, and so they not only make up an absurd strawman,

but take it to an absolute extreme.


Really demonstrates the depth of your fear of the truth.

ANywhooo, your use of a strawman is an admission that you know I am right.

THe difference in the way the media covered Obama's endorsement by the Communist Party compared to the way the media covered Trump's endorsement by the Klan, shows that they are engaged not is reporting

but in propaganda.

That's neither a strawman nor admission you're right. You idiotically stated they should be "ignored" and you blamed the left for not ignoring them.

Report yes, massive over coverage to create the illusion of relevance and to use it to smear republicans, no.

I offered as a counter example the way the mainstream media covered the endorsement of Obama by the communists.

Would you like to address the massive differences?

Now you're deviating from your own idiot position; which is that they should be ignored.

Opps, sorry forgot you were a lawyer.


Let me translate from human speech to legalese.


"Ignore" does not mean ban reporting on them or zero mention. It means don't give them massive coverage, lying about their importance or numbers, or connection to significant people or organizations.



I have offered an example of the difference in reporting on the Communist endorsement of Obama, which the media had no interest in, compared to the media coverage of the Klan's "endorsement.



YOu have repeatedly replied to posts with that point in them, but avoided addressing it.


This is obvious evidence that you know it is a valid point.


Show some moral courage and admit it. You will feel better about yourself.

Not "good" but "better".

 

[Correll]

YOur post addressed nothing in my post.


You simply repeated your previous position.


THat is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. Your post is invalid and you lose.


Obviously you have no rebuttal to my last post and thus it stands as the final word, at least until you muster the courage to address it's argument.


Here it si again, so we avoid the common lefty tactic of burying the truth under bs.




I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

LOLOL

You're still trying to argue a quote you never heard???

YOur post addressed nothing in my post.


You simply repeated your previous position.


THat is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. Your post is invalid and you lose.


Obviously you have no rebuttal to my last post and thus it stands as the final word, at least until you muster the courage to address it's argument.


Here it si again, so we avoid the common lefty tactic of burying the truth under bs.




I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

LOLOL

You have no point. You don't know what the guy said. You confessed you didn't watch the video.

Our post addressed nothing in my post.


You simply repeated your previous position.


THat is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. Your post is invalid and you lose.


Obviously you have no rebuttal to my last post and thus it stands as the final word, at least until you muster the courage to address it's argument.


Here it si again, so we avoid the common lefty tactic of burying the truth under bs.




I don't think it was a lie.

In real life, people drop or flip or misuse words sometimes. IN real life, real people, from context pick up on their actual intent. That is what the Original Tree did.

You are a lawyer aren't you? That would explain your not knowing this.

BUT, I pointed out that the phrase, as you heard it, makes absolutely no sense.


UNLESS you believe that this nazis considers "giving your daughter to a jew" as a sign of "more capable".

Which is utterly absurd.

But you will hold to that position because it serves your partisan purpose.

You can keep repeating that mindless nonsense all you want; the fact remains, you have no position to argue about what the guy in that video said since you didn't hear his comment from his own lips. You have absolutely zero knowledge of the context in which he was speaking ... and worse, you're moronically basing your position on the misquote offered by The Original Tree, who was caught lying about what the guy actually said.

I am not disputing the quote.

Thus all your talk about me not watching 20 plus minutes of nazis is irrelevant. COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.


My point is valid, and that is why you are so desperate to avoid it.


Your position on this is based on the absurdity that the Nazi likes Trump BECAUSE Trump "gave his daughter to a jew".


YOu know that is bullshit.


Knock it off.

 

[radical right]

I have offered an example of the difference in reporting on the Communist endorsement of Obama, which the media had no interest in, compared to the media coverage of the Klan's "endorsement..

Trump defended the Klan, Saying they had "very fine people" Obama didn't defend the communists.

That's a BIG difference.

 

[Correll]

Don't know. Why do you ask?




\

Because there were other private car companies. Volkswagon is not evidence of a socialist society.

The question was not whether the German nation was socialist at that time, but whether the Nazis were.

The People's Car, a massive government program to build cheap affordable cars for the People, shows that they were quite socialist.


The nazis had been in control at that point for 5 years. It shows their ideological thinking. Which was/is heavily socialist.

And that doesn't make them socialist as they allowed for private competition.

It shows that they were not pure communists.

To claim that, after merely 5 years in power, that they had not completely nationalized the car industry is proof that they were not socialists is absurd.


The People's Car. Government program to build cars for the masses.


And you can't see any socialism?


Bullshit.

They never nationalized their auto industry nor did they ever claim they wanted to. You're spouting your usual claptrap because it's important to you to tie the Nazi's with the left.

Actually it is not important to me.

The long history of socialism/marxism has plenty to discredit it, without having to tie Nazis to them.


But, your need to deny their socialism, is very interesting.

 

[Correll]

I have offered an example of the difference in reporting on the Communist endorsement of Obama, which the media had no interest in, compared to the media coverage of the Klan's "endorsement..

Trump defended the Klan, Saying they had "very fine people" Obama didn't defend the communists.

That's a BIG difference.

Trump defended the pro-statue protesters, some of which he said were very fine people.

Not everyone who does not want to tear down confederate monuments is in the Klan.


That you felt you had to lie about that, shows that you know you are in the wrong.



THus, that excuse for the media's corruption is debunked.

 

[Faun]

You're actually trying to make the argument that the news shouldn't cover news.

Wow. That is such a powerful example of someone, who knows they can't refute what their political enemy says, and so they not only make up an absurd strawman,

but take it to an absolute extreme.


Really demonstrates the depth of your fear of the truth.

ANywhooo, your use of a strawman is an admission that you know I am right.

THe difference in the way the media covered Obama's endorsement by the Communist Party compared to the way the media covered Trump's endorsement by the Klan, shows that they are engaged not is reporting

but in propaganda.

That's neither a strawman nor admission you're right. You idiotically stated they should be "ignored" and you blamed the left for not ignoring them.

Report yes, massive over coverage to create the illusion of relevance and to use it to smear republicans, no.

I offered as a counter example the way the mainstream media covered the endorsement of Obama by the communists.

Would you like to address the massive differences?

Now you're deviating from your own idiot position; which is that they should be ignored.

Opps, sorry forgot you were a lawyer.


Let me translate from human speech to legalese.


"Ignore" does not mean ban reporting on them or zero mention. It means don't give them massive coverage, lying about their importance or numbers, or connection to significant people or organizations.



I have offered an example of the difference in reporting on the Communist endorsement of Obama, which the media had no interest in, compared to the media coverage of the Klan's "endorsement.



YOu have repeatedly replied to posts with that point in them, but avoided addressing it.


This is obvious evidence that you know it is a valid point.


Show some moral courage and admit it. You will feel better about yourself.

Not "good" but "better".

LOL

Now you're trying to redefine words?

Definition of ignore

1. to refuse to take notice of​